Did Broncos get murky assist on passing over Lacy? Lard

Good Morning, and Happy Memorial Day, Broncos fans! New Denver pass rusher Shaun Phillips says he ultimately picked Denver over Houston for his second NFL home.

Unlike Charles Woodson, Phillips claims he turned down more money from Oakland to avoid the "miserable" experience of being on a losing team.

Meanwhile, there's now some conflict between reports regarding the incentives Phillips could earn with the team.

We know that Phillips signed for a base salary of $1M, which is barely more than the $840K minimum for a player of his experience. We've already discussed how much of a bargain that is, but how much more can he earn?

Mike Klis originally reported that Phillips can make an extra $2M based upon reaching sack milestones, starting at the threshold of eight QB takedowns.

However, according to Jeff Legwold, those incentives don't kick in unless Phillips reaches the 10-sack mark, with $400K coming at the 10-, 12-, and 14-sack levels, for a total of just $1.2M.

This is obviously a rather significant difference, although one thing is clear - whatever the details of his contract, Phillips will have to be rather successful rushing the passer if he's to make more than his $1M salary.

Broncos

Jeff Legwold says the Broncos almost certainly got an assist from the Steadman Clinic in evaluating the prognosis of Eddie Lacy's surgically repaired toe, which he says at least three teams expect will cause Lacy problems within two or three seasons. Now, it's no surprise that Denver is going to great lengths to research its potential draft picks, but this sounds like a breach of medical ethics, doesn't it?

Obviously, we're not alone in our bitter distaste for John Fox's handling of the Baltimore game; Gregg Rosenthal and Michael David Smith react to Woody Paige's interview with Fox.

Here are transcribed quotes from HOFers John Elway, Floyd Little, Shannon Sharpe, and Gary Zimmerman, who offered their thoughts on Pat Bowlen during the Mizel Institute's tribute to the Broncos owner.

News

The Giants' re-signing of WR Ramses Barden came via the NFL's minimum salary benefit, which is intended to encourage teams to sign players at the minimum regardless of their experience levels. Especially at this part of the year, when most teams have at least 50 of their final 53 currently on their rosters, the difference between a player counting for $940K (for a 10+ year player) or $630K, as Barden will, is a big factor for cap-strapped teams like the Giants.

After Buttfumble threw three picks among eleven attempts on Wednesday, Jets OC Marty Mornhinweg hilariously said his QB's "completion percentage and accuracy percentage have been sky high up to date." Our first thought is that everyone should have a boss like Mornhinweg, but our second thought is that both figure to be out of a job, if they maintain this trajectory.

There is some controversy regarding Geno Smith's decision to sign with Roc Nation, as it appears to be a violation of the NFLPA's runner rule, which appears to be a dumb rule.

Analysis

In his MMQB column, Peter King wonders if the LOLJets bother to do any research on players like Mike Goodson prior to signing them.

If the Broncos are to advance farther than the divisional round in 2013 after not doing so in 2012, it will actually be something of a rarity in the four-division format. FWIW (not much), the only team since 2002 to lose in the divisional round and win a SB the next year were Peyton Manning's Colts.

Miscellany

Robbie Rogers suited up for the LA Galaxy of the MLS last night, overcoming his own apprehension about being the first openly gay man to play for a (major) professional sports league in North America.

Chase Stuart and Ken Crippen list the NFL players who have been lost in service to our country. Stuart's thoughts (and those he quotes) are particularly poignant on this, and every day. Thank you, Veterans, and to all who have suffered such a loss, our thoughts are with you, as always.

Fox sent home with flu-like symptoms; Broncos to face Pryor at QB on Sunday; Niners edge Falcons in MNF thriller; Chiefs likely to rest key players

No need to apologize about Welker. I mainly brought it up because of my reaction. As much as I love the written word, I'm usually aware of its limitations. In person, we almost always know what someone means and this is true most of the time when we hear someone speak. When we read something, we don't get to assess body language or verbal inflections. We can't even necessarily be sure someone had the time to read something we wrote to them, which was the case here.

If I had really wanted to engage you in a discussion about the Welker signing, I had daily opportunities. Instead, I just said screw it and made a few snippy comments on other threads until the 14 old inside me was satisfied. This is the price others must sometimes pay, but I love my inner 14 year old. I try to keep him off the internet as much as possible for obvious reasons.

I supported Tebow when he was here and was pretty cool with him up until he tried to offer up Elway as human sacrifice to the jilted swamp rats in Jacksonville. That Pittsburgh game was the most exciting sporting event I ever attended as the total strangers I bearhugged after the OT touchdown will attest.

I also admit that I allowed myself to project Tebow's future under a best case scenario while he was here. I focused on his good plays and convinced myself that he was making progress as a passer, however incremental. I found it very easy to flip my opinion about him when he was gone.

I think this is human nature, too. We tend to give our friends the benefit of the doubt for behaviors we would mercilessly criticize in others. A person might harshly condemn infidelity, but then he finds out his best friend is having an affair. Now he's faced with weighing loyalty against his own moral code. Not so easy anymore. His friend begins to explain the situation and additional context gives him even more to think about. Of course, we never have these interactions with people we condemn from afar.

Well, now I'm just procrastinating yard work. Your efforts are much appreciated, Douglas. You're one of the primary reasons IAOFM is the best Bronco website I've ever had the pleasure of joining.

Posted by Yahmule on 2013-05-28 13:08:12

Yahmule I'm sorry about the Welker thing, but I can tell you there was no intentional snub involved.

As much as we value our readers and their comments - and I think you know that I have plenty of respect for you specifically - we don't always get to read all of the comments. This is especially the case when there's a lot going on news- and writing-wise.

I realize that can make for an inconsistent experience, but it's just the reality of our time constraints and the balance between producing content and responding to comments. There are some days when I read zero comments.

I don't doubt that you floated the idea of Welker to Denver, and I'm sure you did so before I did here...

...but I don't think you and I had the sort of disagreement you describe above. I don't recall ever having been against the idea of Denver signing him, but if I wrote something that suggested as such, please do remind me.

As for the rest of your thoughts here, they're particularly excellent. We don't cater our content to comments, and as you state, the comments here remain vibrant, no matter who comes and goes.

For example, if we had concerned ourselves with making everyone happy from Day 1, I would still be writing about how good I thought Tim Tebow could be. It may be hard to remember through all my Zombie trolling, but there was a long period of time during which I thought Tebow was Denver's QB of the future, and was quite emphatic in support of that point right here.

We had countless commenters announce their departures/boycotts of IAOFM because, once I saw reason to change my evaluation of him, I stated daily that Tebow can't throw a football.

The comments regarding my criticism of Foxball are basically of the same "I'm taking my ball and going home" variety, and I should note that I've never once suggested that Fox be fired. Not once.

Just like I'm not going to back off my (changed) evaluation of Tebow, I'm not about to start calling Fox a good game-day decision-maker just because a certain commenter whines and demands it.

And guess what? It's May, and I write about the Broncos every single day of the year. You know what's going to come up countless times over the next several months or even years?

Foxball.

And as usual, I don't bring it up out of the blue. Just like with Tebow, or the racist nature of the Washington team's name, or gay marriage, I don't just wake up and decide to write about a topic in the Lard on my own. I'm prompted to do so by the content that is out there. I do not have a fertile enough mind to think of something new to write about 365 times a year without outside inspiration.

Again, thanks for your support and always excellent comments, and I'm sorry about the Welker thing.

Posted by Douglas Lee on 2013-05-28 09:49:57

Let me guess on this -- as comments show, the presumption is that a waiver was signed. But we need to understand the context of this issue.

Lacy's services were being sought in a commercial arrangement in which 'private' easily becomes secret, thus potentially giving one party an unfair advantage over the others. And for the very reason being cited, it's problematic if information could be withheld, since that increases its value and thereby raises the potential of misconduct. Therefore, even though I don't wish to wish to dismiss the general importance of privacy in most situations, this is a situation in which disclosure is needed, because there are teams bidding for Lacy's services who might mistakenly believe he was in good health and could thus be drawn into a contract under false pretenses.

Privacy concerns are clearly justified but "insider trading" is possible because of privacy, too, as are fraudulent transactions in which information is purposely withheld for illicit purposes. Moreover, putting the burden on the Steadman clinic to keep such information private can be a recipe for corruption. In this case, the wall of privacy becomes the problem itself, because of the great advantage conveyed by possessing this esoteric knowledge, and therefore a great temptation to circumvent the rule, Not only is the rule likely to be ineffective but it increases the probability of unethical parties attempting to compromise privacy for financial gain.

Posted by colinski2 on 2013-05-28 09:27:00

^ #20. Fantastic comments.

Posted by broncosmontana on 2013-05-28 01:24:29

"You either develop filters to deal with them or you walk around pissed off all the time."

So true.

Posted by jvill on 2013-05-27 21:16:32

Froze up again.

Playoffs.. Then a stunning things happens and everyone expects him to do something completely against his DNA..

To do that is foolish.

He is what he is a defensive coach that plays odds on field position. Those are in his DNA.

Now the question is will Manning and a Rookie OC change that DNA this coming year?

Something I would not bet on.. Odds are he will change a bit but if the same situation happens again he is going play Foxball. IMO

Posted by Lonestar47 on 2013-05-27 17:55:11

I was not necessarily saying it was you that implied firing Fox. But the prevailing thought is like what you stated above. He should change or better yet, he should changed IN HIS FIRST YEAR and even more completely changed his DNA in coaching in Mannings FIRST playoff game..

That sort of trust does not come over night for a guy like Fox. Those are FACTS OF LIFE, that everyone expected to happen..

How many years has he been a Defensive guy?

That was why he was hired to fix the D and stabilize the team, mostly the latter.

He improved the team BIG time in his first year with players that John gave him. Then he got a HOF QB that helped win loads of games. A QB that has not had his best games in playoff

Posted by Lonestar47 on 2013-05-27 17:50:33

"Constant complaining about the situation is a process of self marginalization and extremely boring to read, as I will demonstrate in the next two paragraphs." lol!

Thanks for sharing a perspective that we can all afford to be reminded of now and then.

Nicely stated. As you point out, it's Doug's, TJ's, Doc's and Ted's site and they can do with it as they please. The whole idea here is to have opinions, back them up, toss it back and forth and above all, be entertained. I hope we can get past the off season crabbiness and and both appreciate what the site has to offer and keep having a little fun around here. Thanks to everyone and Go Broncs!

Posted by SteveS on 2013-05-27 16:35:39

BTW, all he has to say is "if circumstances come up again, we certainly will consider all options and maybe we should have done so then too". At least he would diffuse the perception of being stubborn.

Posted by Orange_and_Blue on 2013-05-27 13:53:49

Well put. I don't see a Fire Fox campaign brewing, at all.

To accept someone as one who can never change his ways, no matter how successful, is completely void of reason. I thought the whole idea was that the Broncos only goal was to "win the Super Bowl". A mistake can happen in any instance; however, to avoid mistakes when the circumstances presented (31 seconds 2 timeouts vs a Defense in likely a prevent D) would not be any better later on....WHY NOT take one snap and look to throw the ball?

Bottom line, IMO, Fox was inexcusably shell-shocked which he won't publicly ever admit. Yes, there always other plays in the game that contributed to losing the game, but the act of inaction was done at the wrong time and wrong place - regardless of how conservative he coaches. The difference is a "smart" play versus a "scared" play.

Posted by Orange_and_Blue on 2013-05-27 13:50:58

I don't agree with everything posted by Douglas or anybody else on this site. I do enjoy the content presented here enough to be a regular reader and contributor. Many of the posters here are intelligent and perceptive and, most importantly, they're capable of changing my opinions when they present persuasive enough arguments. Some others really have little to offer, but their participation doesn't diminish my enjoyment of the site. We all encounter people who are full of crap, by our individual definitions, everyday. You either develop filters to deal with them or you walk around pissed off all the time.

I disagree with Douglas more often than with the other contributors on this site, but this is purely a function of his prolific output of daily material. Even when I'm completely at odds with his conclusion, I usually respect the analysis used to arrive at his viewpoint.

It was noted, anecdotally, that some individuals described as quality posters have been turned off by The Daily Lard and post less frequently now. I disagree with this assertion. There are still high quality conversations taking place on this board on a regular basis, but each one requires at least two participants.

If some people are posting less (and it's not just because the Broncos haven't played a game in four and a half months) that's their choice. If anyone believes they're going to change the way things are done here to pander to the sensibilities of a small group of people, I believe they're going to be disappointed. Constant complaining about the situation is a process of self marginalization and extremely boring to read, as I will demonstrate in the next two paragraphs.

I have no problem with Douglas taking a hard line on certain issues. The only thing I really want to see is consistency and accountability. I did take issue with the way Douglas and especially Ted handled the Wes Welker signing. When I suggested the Broncos pursue Welker I really didn't even get the courtesy of a direct reply. Instead, Ted posted something a couple days later scoffing at the idea and suggesting anyone who believed the Broncos would pursue Welker or any other high dollar free agent was a bit dim. I had already explained that Welker wasn't going to command anything like number one wide receiver money, but that was simply ignored.

When the Broncos signed Welker, I was interested in seeing Ted's reaction. I wasn't that surprised to see him spending most of his time crowing about how it was a perfect fit for the offense. He explained away his being 100% wrong by claiming nobody knew the market would be that soft. Of course, this wasn't true, because I predicted that was a distinct possibility on this website.

I'm bringing this up because it presented me with options. I could accept that the parameters of discussion here are beyond my control; I could complain a lot; I could find another board where everybody agrees with me. I decided that the good on this board far outweighs the bad.

As I reflected a bit further, I realized my perception of the Welker disagreement was obviously different than it was for Douglas or Ted. Since I was a little annoyed about the whole thing, the chances of constructive discussion were diminished.

It's a rare thing to change anyone's mind about anything on the internet. Those miniscule odds are further reduced each time someone posts a declarative statement. People defend their opinions more fiercely once they've been stated, more fiercely still once they've been challenged. You will never break through that defensiveness in most people and if you do, they're not likely to admit you were the one who changed their mind. This is human nature.

Go Broncos.

Posted by Yahmule on 2013-05-27 13:35:12

I am not calling for Fox's head and saying he should be replaced. This would make the Broncos unstable, not better. Quite simply a bad decision for a guy with one glaring weakness (IMO). You coach the team you have and no question his philosophy was dead on when he head Delhomme or when we played lousy teams.

I simply believe he needs to allow the Offense to be a bit more aggressive at times and less predictable late in games. If it takes JE to step in and make it so, I'm happy. If it takes Gase to make his own decisions, great. If it takes Manning to make it happen, just fine.

If nothing happens, and we win, as I said above was more than possible and potentially likely, then great. I believe we have the best team in the NFL if Manning and Miller are healthy.

Posted by Broncologist on 2013-05-27 13:33:16

They do sign waivers.

Posted by Doc Bear on 2013-05-27 13:29:43

As for the Doctor "assisting" on Lacy. Did he specially talk about Lacy or a hypothical Toe fusion where in his experience of what happened in those cases.

As Doc can easily say and has said certain conditions/ailments of player have only so many long term prognosis's..

If there is a hppa thing going on I'm sure Lacys attorneys will fix it

Posted by Lonestar47 on 2013-05-27 13:28:55

Ipad disqus fighting again.

Let me add AGAIN our first game with BAL they had significant players missing. They also completely revamped their OL which confused some one because our pass rush was non existent compared to the first time around.

The Broncos were over confident (as were the fans) going into the game.

And perhaps let's not forget a very huge factor the tempature during the game and Manning saying afterward he did not have feeling in his arm and hand like normal.

I firm beleive that Fox was taking all of that into consideration when he made the choice, just like he has during his career. Do not put your defense into a very bad spot deeper in their territory than it has to be.

Posted by Lonestar47 on 2013-05-27 13:21:45

IMO the only way that changes is replacing Fox. In essence then starting from scratch with new coordinators on down and new schemes.

Fox has always been a run first guy and he has always had a stable of good OL, RBs and a couple of good WRs. Not two great WRs ..

IIRC we had a 13-3 season and won like 12 straight after a really bad game by Manning in ATL.

And loads of folks are bitching..

What happened when tanahan did the same crap (by that I mean take a dump in the playoffs).

did you all the all piss,and moan about that also?

Single out a couple,of plays and crap,on your great mastermind.. Thought so.

Posted by Lonestar47 on 2013-05-27 13:13:45

Get ready for some down arrows from the FAP'ers. It's fun. (as I expect some myself)

Posted by Orange_and_Blue on 2013-05-27 12:08:37

Okay I am weighing in on Foxball and the nature of yesterday's comments. I agree with 90% of everything Doug writes. BUT who cares? This is Doug's platform. He can and SHOULD write what he thinks. I mean, really. Really.

On to Foxball - Put me in the corner of majorly concerned. My first concern - The fake field goal. Not conservative, just plain dumb. I mean, really. As noted on this site, there were many games where we shut it down to make a blow out close. Whatever.

However, as Doug and others noted here, we knew that could get us in trouble. Guess what, it did against Baltimore. And he calls himself out for the 3rd and 7 call after doing just that all year? Give me a break. That was actually the ONE instance where it made sense because we needed them to burn their timeouts. And he is calling that a mistake? Does no one see a problem with that?!?!?

I will say this - Foxball should have netted a Superbowl last year. The refs were so very awful, really really awful, really, Champ had the worst game of his career, and Rahim.... So despite Fox's misgivings, I believe he will still win a title with Peyton Manning.

Posted by Broncologist on 2013-05-27 12:00:49

There was a post on here recently which said the NFLPA has essentially negotiated away their HIPAA protection.

Posted by Yahmule on 2013-05-27 11:54:53

What denverkewl said, I'm sure that a medical record release was signed by Lacy.

Posted by Irony_Tag on 2013-05-27 11:15:03

On Lacy: You are correct its a breach for the Doc to comment to third parties on the specific case unless the patient signed a release under HPPA. He could advise on the general type of injury and the standard of care and data on rehab, re-injury etc - much as Doc Bear does here. So, since these dudes undergo physicals at the combine, do they sign a release/consent at that time? My guess is that they do and must...hence the Broncos/NFL would be covered...I can't imagine a Doc of that caliber talking secretly about the case - taking all that risk on a high profile situation.. without covering his ass...was he at the combine?